Court Dismisses Lawsuit on Ghost Gun Rule Tightness

A federal appeals court rejected a lawsuit by California and Giffords claiming that a rule to control ghost guns isn't stringent enough. The court ruled that harm claims were speculative, following previous judgments on the matter and the constitutional right to bear arms debates.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has dismissed a lawsuit by California and the Giffords advocacy group, who challenged the adequacy of a ghost gun regulation measure from the Biden administration. The judges unanimously agreed that the plaintiffs did not sufficiently demonstrate that the regulation caused them harm.

This decision arrived just days after a Texas judge declared the rule unconstitutional, citing the Second Amendment's right to bear arms. The controversial rule concerns the regulation of partially completed firearm components that can be assembled into functional weapons.

In its verdict, the court stated that the alleged damages were speculative and lacked a direct connection to the rule's application. This case marks an ongoing debate over the regulatory measures governing largely untraceable firearms known as ghost guns.